## Facts

- High-stakes civil litigation over control of a supermarket business was pending before a Massachusetts Superior Court judge.
- Kevin P. Curry, a lawyer, and a private investigator approached a dissatisfied litigant and, without evidence, asserted the judge had “fixed” the case and taken a bribe.
- The litigant retained Curry to investigate alleged judicial misconduct tied to an adverse ruling.
- Curry learned the judge’s former law clerk was seeking private employment and devised a plan to elicit statements about the judge’s confidential deliberations.
- Curry helped create a fictitious “dream job” and sham interview process to pressure the law clerk into portraying himself as the author of the key opinion and stating the judge had decided the outcome in advance.
- The plan involved false representations, staged interviews, and travel arranged to reinforce the deception.
- The scheme was uncovered, causing embarrassment to the judge, the law clerk, and their families and risking harm to public confidence in the courts.
- Disciplinary authorities charged Curry with violations of the Massachusetts Code of Professional Responsibility; a hearing officer found extensive misconduct and recommended disbarment, and the Board of Bar Overseers largely adopted those findings and unanimously recommended disbarment.

## Issues

1. Whether Curry’s false accusations against a sitting judge and his orchestration of a deceptive scheme targeting the judge’s former law clerk violated the professional conduct rules prohibiting dishonesty, conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, and assisting fraudulent conduct.
2. Whether disbarment was the appropriate sanction given the nature, intent, and duration of the misconduct and the absence of mitigating factors.

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court accepted the Board of Bar Overseers’ unanimous recommendation.
- The court ordered the matter remanded for entry of a judgment of disbarment.
- The court found egregious, multiple, and prolonged rule violations involving dishonesty and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, with no mitigation warranting a lesser sanction.

## Legal Principles

- A lawyer violates professional duties by making or advancing knowingly unfounded accusations of judicial corruption or bias, particularly for personal financial gain.
- Orchestrating or participating in deceitful conduct—including through third parties—to obtain strategic advantage in litigation constitutes dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
- Conduct intended to penetrate or exploit confidential judicial deliberations, including judge–law clerk communications, is prejudicial to the administration of justice and reflects adversely on fitness to practice.
- Counseling, assisting, or directing fraudulent conduct in the course of representation breaches a lawyer’s ethical obligations even if the plan ultimately fails.
- Where misconduct is deliberate, extended, and aimed at undermining judicial integrity, disbarment may be necessary to protect the public and the administration of justice.

## Conclusion

The court disbarred Curry because he pursued a deceptive plan to manufacture damaging statements about a judge’s deliberations and advanced baseless claims of judicial bribery, conduct that was dishonest, threatened judicial independence, and seriously harmed the administration of justice.


In re Curry, 880 N.E.2d 388 (Mass. 2008)